ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN | OK> What about At&t?
Yet, At&t is going ahead with their plans..  |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| AT&T is being a little smarter about their plans...larger caps on low tiers to begin with.
quote:
The boiling frog story states that a frog can be boiled alive if the water is heated slowly enough — it is said that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will never jump out.
TWC = boiling water
AT&T = slowly heating it
Also, is AT&T in that market ? I know they're planning it for TX and Reno, NV.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Fisamo
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Apex, NC | The ILEC there is Embarq. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by Fisamo  :The ILEC there is Embarq. But in most of North Carolina, at least the major cities, it *IS* AT&T. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Isn't it Embarq for Raleigh ? |
|
Fisamo
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Apex, NC
 ·VOIPo
·AT&T CallVantage
| reply to Matt
Absolutely true. I'm in a Uverse area, but the deployment hasn't reached my neighborhood yet. Since AT&T is already wiring up Apex, I doubt our town would consider a muni project (even though we are also an electrical co-op member).
Here's my feeling on the anti-muni bills: They do need to pass one, but it should be very simple.
Any municipality that feels the need to build out its own network should be allowed to do so, without restriction from selling service to residents. However, any municipality that chooses to build its own network must give up all local regulatory power over the telcos and cablecos regarding cost controls and service level requirements (e.g. local franchise agreements).
Suppose a town were to build a fiber network and operate it as a common carrier--operate the physical plant and resell the service to AT&T/TWC/whoever. Could such a model fly? In such a model, what say (if any) could the municipality have with regard to speed offerings, caps, prices? |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| said by Fisamo : In such a model, what say (if any) could the municipality have with regard to speed offerings, caps, prices? Or liabilities that other providers being hooked for now.
Does the RIAA/MPAA get to inspect packets or do they make the muni do it?
Do this impose throttling at peak hours? |
|
ericdaboy
join:2005-09-21
West Palm Beach, FL
| said by S_engineer :said by Fisamo : In such a model, what say (if any) could the municipality have with regard to speed offerings, caps, prices? Or liabilities that other providers being hooked for now. Does the RIAA/MPAA get to inspect packets or do they make the muni do it? Do this impose throttling at peak hours? Do you know how the reports get to the abuse dept of the ISPs from the MPAA or RIAA? |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to en102
said by en102 :Isn't it Embarq for Raleigh ? Nope, AT&T. I know AT&T has my area (Winston-Salem, parts of High-Point and all of Greensboro), the majority of Charlotte, and the RDU area. Research Triangle Park is Verizon for some weird reason, but no FiOS yet. AT&T is also Ashville I believe. Embarq is mainly in the rural areas. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to ztmike
said by ztmike :Yet, At&t is going ahead with their plans.. Here's why TW was getting all the heat
Comcast 250 GB cap all tiers
Charter 15 Mbps and under 100 GB, 16-25 mbps 250 GB, 26 Mbps and over no cap
At&t caps 20,40,60,80 and 150 GB.
TW 5,10,20,40 GB.
at&t caps are a joke too but at least they start out with 20 GB not 5. |
|
Tsume
join:2004-02-23
Johnson City, TN
·Embarq
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
| reply to en102
said by en102 :Isn't it Embarq for Raleigh ? I think that area is similar to Orlando. 95% of Orlando is AT&T, I live in part that is Embarq. |
|
NPGMBR
join:2001-03-28
Arlington, VA
| reply to ztmike
Ok is it just me or does this whole debate about metered service somehow back up the indistry's claim that a-la-carte service would boost prices?
Are the people complaining about metered service heavy users or is it everyone thats testing it complaining? |
|
jadebangle
Premium
join:2007-05-22
Olathe, KS
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Comcast
|  reply to BF69
said by BF69 :said by ztmike :Yet, At&t is going ahead with their plans.. Here's why TW was getting all the heat Comcast 250 GB cap all tiers Charter 15 Mbps and under 100 GB, 16-25 mbps 250 GB, 26 Mbps and over no cap At&t caps 20,40,60,80 and 150 GB. TW 5,10,20,40 GB. at&t caps are a joke too but at least they start out with 20 GB not 5. But road runner took it to the next step they should be praised not insulted!!!
If I was an ISP I would do something like this...
1GB CAP for lowest Tier
2GB CAP for next higher
3gb cap for next higher
4gb etc and higher...
1 dollar per GB is awesome...
The ISP doesn't pay per GB but per megabit
I heard it was 4-5 dollar per MBIT
24.99 for lowest tier at 768k
20gb usage.... tackled 19.00 = a total of
43.99
an extra profits of 19.00
AWESOME  |
|
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
1 edit | said by jadebangle :
I heard it was 4-5 dollar per MBIT Lower than that if you have your own network. |
|
Anonymous Coward
@verizon.net
| reply to jadebangle
said by jadebangle :If I was an ISP I would do something like this... 1GB CAP for lowest Tier 2GB CAP for next higher 3gb cap for next higher 4gb etc and higher... 1 dollar per GB is awesome... The ISP doesn't pay per GB but per megabit I heard it was 4-5 dollar per megabit 24.99 for lowest tier at 768k 20gb usage.... tackled 19.00 = a total of 43.99 an extra profits of 19.00 AWESOME Uh, you're doing it wrong. ISPs and co-location customers are typically billed either on a weekly average or a 95th percentile utilization of a bandwidth of x Mb/s. They can easily go through hundreds of GB a month and not exceed their allotment of bandwidth OVER TIME (the unit measure is Mb/s where "s" is seconds). A cap works off of an *ABSOLUTE* counter wherein after one exceeds that absolute cap of GB, either an alternate (read: SLOW) traffic shaping plan is applied to that user or they get billed for overages. In other words, the "OVER TIME" bit is one whole month for the poor residential cap victim, GB/m. That's a BIG difference. |
|
